Reflective Account of Environmental Assessment Essay

Reflective Account of Environmental Assessment - Essay Example environmental management system (EMS), environmental impact assessment, environmental statement, carbon accounting, and carbon management in buildings, environmental economic appraisal and strategic environment management. All these activities aim at securing the environment. The environmental management system (EMS) is a kind of tool and program that is used in managing the impacts of the activities on the environment at large. EMS provides an effective approach and structure of planning and implementing measures of protection of the environment. An EMS ensures that environmental management are integrated in an organizations day to day activities, short term goals and in long term planning of the organizations objectives (Melnyk, Robert and Roger, 2003). For an organization to be able to come up with an EMS, it should first access and analyze the impact it has on the environment, it should come up with goals of reducing impacts on the environment and come up with a strategy of achieving the goals and objectives that have been set. For the development of an effective EMS, commitment and support should be evident from the top level management to the staff as well (Sroufe, 2003). The environmental policy of the organization should be firstly considered when coming up with an EMS. The policy ensures that the activities of EMS are in line with the objectives of the organization. An environmental audit should be taken before coming up with an EMS to help in identifying the impacts of the organizations activities on the environment. The target and objectives of an organization should also be considered when developing an EMS because it will guide the organization on how to achieve it. The staff and the community surrounding the environment should be committed before, during and after the establishment or developing of the EMS. The operations and procedures also need to be compatible with the objectives of the EMS. The monitoring of the performance of the organization

Glimpse Of The Indian Society Media Essay

Glimpse Of The Indian Society Media Essay Media today presents a glimpse of the Indian society that is filled with images of tradition, romance, nationalism and familial love. Teeming with energetic music, vibrant colors and heavenly portrayals of Indian families, the audiences are easily cajoled into believing that these depictions are accurate representations of attitudes and beliefs of the Indian life. However, many times, the realities of life do not always approximate the images presented by the media. As a result, media sometimes start affecting the society in an ominous manner. One such issue that is distorted by the media is the dowry system. In the process of raising alarm bells, Bollywood films, TV shows and news media have exploited this issue too much and consequently, worsened its effect. The insatiable greed of the in-laws, which ultimately leads to torturing of brides, has been highlighted so many times by the media that the viewers minds no longer recoils from such phenomenon. Moreover, with the rising consum erism, higher standards of living and exposure to the masses through media, the desires of people for material wealth have also gone up, aggravating the malevolent system of dowry. The dowry system, the custom of making payments from the brides family to the grooms family at the time of marriage, has a long history in India. It stems out from the traditional upper caste practices of kanyadaan or gifting the virgin bride (). Traditionally, these gifts could range from anything significant to even small token of good wishes. Historically, the dowry system could have been established as a form of inheritance for women, because only men inherited the family property. Furthermore, it could have been a way of compensating the grooms family for the economic support that they would give to the new bride as women has little role as bread earners for the family, making them dependent on the in laws. However, in recent times with exposure to mass media, these tokens of gifts or dowry have transformed into substantial transfer of wealth from the grooms family to the brides family, becoming an important factor in marriage proposals. Most of the marriage decisions nowadays a re based on how much dowry is the brides family ready to give. Even if the bride and groom do not suit each other, their marriage is arranged based on the exchange of dowry between the families. (). However, in the current society, where even women act as economic contributors to the family, this system becomes trivial. Yet, it has only inflamed with time. Consequently, the Government of India could not do much to alleviate this issue. Even with the changes brought about by the Hindu Succession Acts of 1956, which gave women legal rights of inheritance, and Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961, which legally outlawed dowry respectively, this practice still continues mainly because of two reasons. Firstly, even though in recent times, the exposure to media decreased the support for dowry among women, it appears that women have started valuing the resources that their dowries bring to their families. The exposure to mass media increased the desirability of consumer goods, causing the newly wed couples to view dowry as a way of obtaining them (). The other reason is that parents of daughters still believe that a large dowry will ensure better treatment of their daughters by her in-laws. They believe that the dowry will increase their daughters standing in her new household as it will act as a signal of parental support of the bride. However, thi s belief is largely baseless and stems from medias misrepresentation of this issue through its different outlets. Dowry is a hot topic that many Bollywood films tried to address. Films like Lajja and Lage Raho Munnabhai try to create awareness about this issue by depicting extreme sequences. However, this path taken by the directors sometimes backfires. In Lajja, Maithilis parents give everything to fulfill the dowry demands put up by their in-laws. They lose their land, saved money and even take on loans for the dowry. Though, Maithili rebels and calls off the wedding, seeing her father being humiliated by the grooms family for dowry. Even in Lago Raho Munnabhai, Simrans father Lucky Singh goes on to appropriating an old age house, leaving 20 old men homeless because the grooms parents wanted the land on which house was built. These acts by the brides family do not take place in the real world. However, they are able to distort the views of audiences, who then start believing strongly in this system. Vivah A journey from Engagement to Marriage, another mainstream Bollywood film, also presents a distorted vision of the dowry system but towards the other extreme. In the film, the grooms father wants nothing more for his son than a virtuous and beautiful wife dowry is unimportant and unwanted (). As Poonams father is asked for a mere token, the viewers are assured that a dowry is unnecessary when two families are as well suited as these. These films, as a result, distort the way the society views the dowry system. The reality of dowry demands in India is quite different from its portrayal in Bollywood films. The images of the dowry system presented in these films are not usually what comes to pass for a woman after her marriage and the giving of her dowry. In Lajja, Maithilis parents tried to call of the wedding because Maithilis father could not fulfill all but one of their demands. This would never happen in the real world. Similarly, what Lucky Singh did in Lage Raho Munnabhai to fulfill the dowry is unlikely to be seen today. However, one would also not find someone like Poonams father- in- law, who declined the dowry given by Poonams father. There are still many Indian marriages, where the brides treatment at the hands of her in-laws is often tied to the amount of dowry they receive. Moreover, theses dowry demands sometimes do not end with the wedding (). The shameless greed of the grooms families in the form of dowry demands continue for years after the wedding, with suggestions of furth er gifts to be made-for celebrations of the birth, naming and initiation of grandchildren. Most of the Bollywood fail to show this aftermath of a dowry induced marriage. According to Bedi, the ever-increasing demands for dowry have led to an increase in dowry-related violence and death among young married women in India, with 8391 dowry death cases in 2010 alone. The violence that the women have to undergo, despite giving dowry, has increased exponentially with the demands of the every-growing dowries. This dowry-related violence is mostly prearranged attacks within the grooms house. Many of these attacks include severe burnings, poisonings, hangings, gunshots, sharp objects, and jumping from height, generally resulting in the immediate deaths of the women (). Furthermore, the victims do not report this due to fear of another attack. They have to accept this cruelty as the price of keeping their families intact (). In some of the dowry-induced marriages, women try to commit suicides in a bid to escape the abuse from her in-laws. However, other families try to take advantage of these cases by reporting the death caused by dowry violence as suicides an d protect themselves from trials. Media, in such cases, immediately tries to capitalize on them through films and TV shows. A recent Bollywood film, Teen Behenein is based on the real-life incident of combined suicides by three sisters, which occurred in Kanpur in 1988. Though this film has flaws in every technical aspect, including script, direction and acting, it still managed to receive praise merely because of the issue that it takes up. Teen Behenien seeks to make an important point about the kinds of sexual, social, psychological and physical violence that continues to be encountered by women. This film only takes the seed of its story from real-life incidents of combined suicides by three sisters, and then builds a narrative around it (). The director was able to influence the society by combining the fictional and non-fictional worlds. In order to profit, the director exploited the issue of dowry system by exploiting it. Satyamev Jayate, a reality TV, also tried hard to create awareness about dowry. Aamir Khan, a famous Bollywood actor, is the protagonist who reveals social issues that are prevalent in India which need to be addressed. In the dowry-focused episode, Aamir delineates that every hour one bride in the country dies due to dowry harassment. This certainly is not true. Consequently, he invites a few women who have been victims of the dowry system to speak about their torture. For instance, Komal Sethi spoke about how after being tortured to pay a hefty amount to her in-laws and husband, she was left to die in the US. Lecturer Nishana, who underwent a cosmetic surgery to please her husband, succumbed to the dowry demands of her in-laws and ended up committing suicide (1.5 million rupees that were given by her parents. Though, these cases depict the extremes that this system can go to, they leave a mark of the audience who begin to consider girls as burdens. Furthermore, the fact that Satyame v Jayate commercialized such sensitive issues to profit from them only undermines the validity of its claims. In a country, where film stars are considered as ideals, the distorted depiction of their personal lives can have a profound effect on society. Through the creation of superstars, media distorts the view of the Indian society on dowry. In India, film is the principal form of entertainment, and therefore, film stars are accorded a respect otherwise offer only to family elder and men of God(). An average of ten million people a day spend the equivalent of a days wages just to enter into a fantasy world of images of bad landlord, greedy industrialist, corrupt politicians and traditional virtues of virginity, devotion to God and family and service to men (). The protagonists, therefore, become the saviors of mankind and the actors start to be revered by the Indian public. According to Gokulsing and Dissanayake, star worship offer a mental escape from the pressures and poverty of everyday life and statements or actions made by big Bollywood stars, like Amitabh or Shahrukh, can have great effects on public attitudes. In high profile and star-studded marriages, the dowry worth fortunes are given; however, just as a custom. Millions of rupees in cash, gold, along with luxurious cars are given by the brides family, but this is not a compulsion and is given just out of generosity. However, the masses get influenced when they see this on the televisions and their desires increase many- folds. They start dreaming of lavish wedding and end up making brides lives miserable, ruining their families and turning the concept of marriage has been turned into a transaction, without any importance placed on the people or the relationship (). As a result of the societys distortion view of the dowry system, in many parts of the country, the birth of a girl is not seen as an event to celebrate. Unlike the loving parents of Poonam in Vivah, the thoughts of many Indian parents are not positive at the birth of a daughter (). The lyrics of an old Indian chant used in Punjab Eat the jiggery, spin the cotton, you should not come, send your brother suggests that the birth of a girl is seen as an event of sorrow. There is no singing or celebration, as the parents have to start worrying about the dowry. Girls become a drain of familys money, unlike boys who create income for the family and stay to take care of his parents in their old age (). This belief has skewed the sex ratio in India, fostered by sex-selective abortions and infanticides. Matrubhoomi, a Bollywood film, is set in a hypothetical village in India without women. The film tries to bring forth the message that if the rampant female infanticide and feticide were to cont inue, then there would be a time where there will be no women left. However, this film failed in its goal. The film is so extreme that the audience could not digest it and the film only succeeded at undermining the seriousness of this issue. The numerous representations of dowry system on both big and small screens, it seems to be distorting to an extent. Since the introduction of mass media in the Indian society, views of the people on the dowry have change significantly. The system, which was initially meant as a form of inheritance for women, changed over time because of its misrepresentation by media. The increasing exposure to media coupled, which increased the desirability of consumer goods, transformed this system into a substantial transfer of wealth from the brides family to the grooms and made dowry an important factor determining marriage decisions. Furthermore, recent films like Lajja, Vivah or Teen Beheinen only distorted the societys view on dowry by showing extremes situation that are highly unlikely to occur. On the other hand, TV shows like Satyamev Jayate tried to commercialize this issue; however, undermined its validity in the process. In addition, medias depictions of lavish weddings of media persona lities, increases the dowry systems prevalence as more and more people try to emulate their ideals. Dowry system, therefore, has become a big problem in India and has led to practices of female infanticide skewing the sex ratio in India. In drawing this paper to a close, it is clear that the problem of dowry is only intensified by media. Until media becomes more responsible in its depiction of the dowry system, leaving aside the monetary intentions, this problem will continue unabated.

German Nazism vs. Italian Fascism Essay -- Papers Nazi Fascism Compare

German Nazism vs. Italian Fascism Fascism and Nazism were two different political groups taken place in two different locations. Nazism was evolved in Germany which were the people that mainly were against Judaism. As for fascism, it took place in Italy and focused mainly on a system of government that was under a dictator, or a ruler who had absolute power. Both these groups had similariteis as well as differences in which will soon be understood. Benito Mussolini which was born in 1883 and died in 1945. He came to power with his new ideas in 1919, called Fascio di Combat, which is also known as Fascism. To understand Fascism better, it is basically a spiritual attitude. It sees not only the individual but also the nation and the country. Individuals and generations are bound together by a moral law. Adolf Hitler and his national socialist state influenced Mussolini. In time, Mussolini became the victim of his own propaganda efforts. He dreamed of wars of conquest, but these wars that were far beyond the industrial capacity of the state to maintain. Mussolini came to involved the state in wars of colonial conquest, which was probably the last of the great imperialistic wars of Europe. In 1938 a change was made in the Italian government which separated the people from the decision-making process entirely. The list of parliamentary candidates was no longer offered to the masses for their approval. Mussolini merely emulated Hitler by creating the totalitarian state while removing basic democracy. After Mussolini's fall from power and his heroic rescue by German paratroopers, it was created under the watchful protection of nazi troops. There was, however, time remained to develop a theory. Mussolini was wholly ... ...hen Germany becomes a dictatorship ruled by Hitler and the Nazi Party. It was also the begging of total chaos, such as several revolutions and world War II. There were many revolts like the Kristallnacht, which was a destructive rampage against the Jews. The Jews were drastically restricted and leaving Germany was each time becoming more difficult. In time the Nazis Parteis and Adolph Hitler killed many Jews, more than 30 thousand. Even though World War II was later finished by an agreement, it took many lives away. As for the fascist parties, they were not as gruesome as Nazism, even if one influenced the other. Although both were beliefs, which involved later in to something much greater and catastrophic, they were only people fighting for what they believed were right. But the problem was it effected on innocent's people's lives, and that is not tolerable.

Gays in the Military

Steven Danielson Gays in the Military A hot topic in the news these days is whether gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military. Many issues have arisen from allowing or not allowing gays to serve openly. Those opposed are concerned that gays would cause a break down in unit cohesion, a rise in assaults or violence, a drop in recruitment or retention, and feel that since America is currently fighting two wars that right now is not a good time to implement a new policy when it is felt that the current one is working just fine. Numerous studies have been conducted on this issue.Through poll, surveys, observing other countries that allow gays to serve openly and even by checking history it is felt that this would not be the case. Given all the evidence that points to allowing gays to serve openly outweigh any negatives that would possibly come about. Gays make up a portion of key personnel that is sorely needed in this time of war especially with a all volunteer force. The fa ct that military personal are being lost due to this law not only is harmful to military it also wrong on that these gays are having their basic human rights violated by the very country they are trying to protect.This has been an issue within the military since the very beginnings of its establishment of this nation since â€Å"The discharge of military personnel for homosexual behavior dates from at least the continental army of the revolutionary period† (Rayside 258). The military had a strict no gays allowed to serve for many years and it wasn’t until former president Clinton raised the issue in his campaign for presidency in 1991 did it come onto the radar of the news and on the minds of the American people.He promised to fight to have it so gays could serve in the armed forces of the United States. When he was elected president he set out to change things. Then President made a effort to change the policy but â€Å"Clinton was persuaded by the military, mobilize d by Chief of Staff Colin Powell, not to fulfill his campaign promise to allow gays and leasbians to serve openly† (Pencak 178). He was unable to change the policy drastically and had to settle for a compromise with the military and congress. This is where we got the still standing don’t ask don’t tell policy.This new law allowed gays to serve but they were required to keep their sexual orientation private and by going public with it would end in discharge from the service. The new policy also covered any homosexual actions stating that â€Å"A service member who engages in, attempts to engage in, or solicits a homosexual act is to be discharged, unless he can prove that such an act was an aberration and is unlikely to recur† (Hillman 264). If they were to state that they were gays or attempt to marry someone of the same sex this would too lead to termination.The phrase â€Å"don’t ask don’t tell† comes from the fact that no one will e ver ask if you are gays; as the military used to screen potential future military members by asking them before they joined. The don’t ask tell part comes from the fact that a gay service member must not tell anyone that they are homosexual. Later â€Å"don’t pursue† would added to it, meaning that the military would not pursue a suspected gay member as long as they didn’t tell. This was established out of fear that people would conduct â€Å"witch hunts† for gay members.Since the 1980s over 32,000 active duty members have been discharged for being gay. This is a large percent of people who were willing to serve but through no fault of their own we told they could not and were sent on their way. That is 32,000 already fully trained personnel that had to be replaced costing the country millions of dollars. There had been cases were people with key jobs being discharged as in a few Arabic translators be discharge when as of now they are in great dema nd. Discharging these personal is non sense. Not only is it violating their rights, â€Å"U.S. law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, race, or gender with regard to the rights of citizenship, the military maintains policies that are opposed to this most-basic American ideal† but it is putting this country and other service members at risk cause translators are a key competent of fighting the war on terror (Issit 4). How can a military succeed in winning the hearts and minds of people they cannot even talk with? The number of service members discharged each year in the United States is approximately 1,000-1,200.All of which are needed to be replaced with new people who require training. Losing the experience of those who were serving longer period of times is detrimental to the military because they possess the knowledge and skills required to accomplish the mission and have the ability to pass they knowledge on to new personnel. The amount of money r equired to replace them is enough that any tax paying American would be upset about. There are many reasons for someone to be discharged, from drug use to medical reasons.By changing this law the country would be losing a third less personnel each year. The American public is split on the issue. With about 60% saying that gays should be allowed to serve and 40% feeling they should be able to serve openly. A service wide survey was conducted asking the opinions of those who would be serving side by side with gays. The views of current service member varied much like that of American civilians. But they had reason for their concern when it came to those who opposed it. They were concerns about privacy issues.They were not comfortable with living with a known homosexual. The military does not allow males and females to share a room and there is concern having a same sex and gays living together. This might lead to a change in housing policy and bathroom faculties in having to separate men and women and gay men and lesbian women. This would lead to having to make new restrooms and building of new living quarters for gays. With another concern being the effect on Unit cohesion which can be broken down in two parts; task cohesion and social cohesion.Task cohesion referring to the ability to work together effectively in order to accomplish a mission and social cohesion referring to the emotional bonds and trust among unit members (US Government, DoD 102). The military is worried that gays would become a distraction for straights and this would disrupt the comradely between troops, all of which is very important in a wartime setting â€Å"because soldiers must withstand the tremendous emotional strain of seeing many of their friends brutally killed by the enemy† (Wilson 2). There are also religious and moral issues that have been brought up.The fact is that most religions say the homosexuality is wrong and by making personnel who are religious serve with gays i nfringes on the religious beliefs and the right to religious freedom in the military. Some feel that being gay is just wrong and do no want to be force to work alongside or live with someone of is known to be gay. Some also believe that don’t ask don’t tell law is working just fine and that it should just stay that way feeling that gays can serve but they just have to keep their sexuality to themselves.The same people feel that right now is not the best time to change the policy. Service member have a lot on their plates right now fighting two wars it that a change in the don’t ask don’t tell policy right now is just not the time to do so. There are some who are concerned that if gays were to serve openly then that would result in unwanted sexual advances and assaults. There is objection to gays showing public displays of affection. And that a gays flamboyant behavior would be a distraction. The possibility of a rise in HIV is of concern too.There is a be lief that AIDS is a running epidemic in the gay community and by allowing those to serve would lead to a increase in the HIV cases in the services. Marriage is another issue in that where would the money come from to pay for all the new cases of same sex marriages because married members receive benefits for the spouses and are paid more too. Some members feel that gays would become a protected class and in return would be forced to acknowledge gay pride week and be forced to mingle with them outside of work. With the fear that if they chose no too there would be displiniary actions placed against them.Other feel that the military is the last moral institution in America and feel that allowing gays to serve would destroy that. There are many service members that feel that gays should be allowed to serve openly and the have reasons for their support of the repeal of don’t ask don’t tell policy. Many know that there already are gays serving and by allowing them to acknow ledge their sexual orientation is not going to change anything. There is a feeling that as long as the gay service member can do their job then there is no reason they cannot serve.A person in America has the right to be who they are and by discharging a gay person who only wants to fight and protect the country that provides them that right is wrong. Any American regardless of sexual orientation should be allowed to sever their country. In given that this is a time of war the military needs every service member it can get. Since it is an all volunteer force they should allow anyone who wants to volunteer serve. The military is behind the times when is comes to its policy of homosexuals. It is the only institution that is discriminating openly against gays.It is illegal to fire a person from their jobs for being gays any where else they could be working and the military should be no different. Upon looking at the results of other militaries allowing gays to serve it is scene that it really has no effect on anything what so ever. So there is no reason not to believe that the some non-event would happen in the United States military too. If one is too look on when the military started to allow blacks and white to sever together as well as men and women it is seen that this was not harmful, but actually beneficial to the military as a whole.It is a brden to gays in the military to have to hide their homosexuality and that if there was a repeal to this law then that would liberate them from the fear of discharge. It is not that gays want to be able to tell everyone that they are gay but more that they won’t be afraid of losing their job if it were found out. â€Å"Sexual harassment regulations and sensitivity training would need to be updated, and guidance from leadership would be necessary† if this transition to a openly gay military is to be done (Prakash 92).History is said to repeat itself and if that is the case then there should be no problems associated with the repeal of the â€Å"don’t ask, don’t tell† law. Prior to 1953 blacks were not allowed to serve in the same unit as whites. There are similarities to be found when comparing concerns for when the racial integration of African-Americans was underway and the integration of homosexuals today in that â€Å"military leaders predicted disastrous consequences for unit cohesion, discipline, troop morale, and the achievement of military goals† (Knapp 239).Racial integration was a much bigger deal to the country than that of the integration of gays today. We can see that once racial integration was implemented that it turned out just fine. But it must be acknowledged that blacks are not gays so it won’t be exactly the same type of movement. The integration of women into the military also came out in positive terms. Though gender integration was slower than that of blacks, it is fully integrated today. Today women and blacks make up a sizab le portion of the military and without their service the military would not as strong as it is today.Women and African-Americans have succeeded in the U. S. military so there is no reason to believe that gays and lesbians cannot do the same. Many other nations’ military allow gays to openly serve and they experienced few if any problems because of it. It is such a non existent problem that it is considered a non-issue to most. The major militaries to open to gays are the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Germany, and Israel. When these countries lifted their bans on gays in their militaries they noticed that nothing changed.In a official report released by the Canadian government it was stated that â€Å"Despite all the anxiety that existed through the late 80’s into the early 90’s about the change in policy, here’s what the indicators show—no effect† (Belkin 108). It was thought that maybe a mass coming out would happen but it didn’ t. Most still chose to keep their sexual orientation a private matter and only disclosed it to certain people, much like gays in the corporate world or anywhere else for that matter.The repeal is more for gays not to be discharged or fear being discharged for being gay and less for them to be able to go around and tell everyone that they are gay. There were no noticeable changes to recruiting numbers of the number of people choosing to remain in the military as a result of the lift ban on gays. The United Kingdom show no increase in same sex harassment and most countries commented that harassment die to gender integration was far more pronounced then harassment die to sexual orientation (US Government, DoD 92).This shows one that there is no reason that the integration of gays into the U. S. military will be difficult for its service members to adapt to. It will surely be a non-issue here itself. When looking at the issue of integrating gays into other organizations it is seen that many on the same things occurred that happened in the militaries that did the same. In 1998 an Executive Order was established in the prohibition of discrimination based on the sexual orientation for civilian employees in all Federal agencies. Many states have done the same with state organizations.It is to be noted that employees of these institutions reported that having day and lesbian personnel among their ranks has had no effect on their organization’s performance (US Government, DoD 94). It was found that in some cases allowing gays to be open about their sexual orientation actually improved their performance because now they were not worried about someone finding out they were gay and we able to put more focus on their work. When looking at the issue of privacy that was of a concern to some service members it was seen that in these organizations there was no need for additional accommodations for gays and lesbians.They also say the same thing when it came to gays publi cally announcing their homosexuality. It was found that none really chose to come out to everybody but instead only to certain people. And as far as service member worrying about the â€Å"flamboyant behavior† one might witness in the military by a gay is just not the case in the corporate world. Gays are very well aware of the professionalism associated with a Federal or State job and surely would be the case for any gay military member and would not act in such a way. There are many sides to this debate and given the concerns of each side it should be looked at carefully.When one does observe each side they can see that the concerns of those opposed to the repeal of don’t ask don’t tell are trivial and based on stereotypes and should not be enough to stop and any American from serving their country. The loss of personnel is unacceptable when their service is needed the most in these times of war. When seeing how other militaries favored with their lifting of b ans on gays it can be seen that it was so little a problem and should be the case here. Today’s troops do have a lot going on with fighting two wars and don’t need another thing on their plate, but they do need every helping hand they can get.It most likely would be the case that if repealed many troops would not disclose their sexual orientation so much would not change since a lot of troops know that they are already serving along side gays and lesbians. When weighing the pros and cons of this issue one shouldn’t be able to infringe on a American’s desire to serve their country based on their sexual orientation. It be great if these brave gay and lesbian women didn’t have to worry about their military careers coming to an end of they were or someone were to disclose their sexual orientation that way they would be able to fully concentrate on their mission. Gays in the Military Steven Danielson Gays in the Military A hot topic in the news these days is whether gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military. Many issues have arisen from allowing or not allowing gays to serve openly. Those opposed are concerned that gays would cause a break down in unit cohesion, a rise in assaults or violence, a drop in recruitment or retention, and feel that since America is currently fighting two wars that right now is not a good time to implement a new policy when it is felt that the current one is working just fine. Numerous studies have been conducted on this issue.Through poll, surveys, observing other countries that allow gays to serve openly and even by checking history it is felt that this would not be the case. Given all the evidence that points to allowing gays to serve openly outweigh any negatives that would possibly come about. Gays make up a portion of key personnel that is sorely needed in this time of war especially with a all volunteer force. The fa ct that military personal are being lost due to this law not only is harmful to military it also wrong on that these gays are having their basic human rights violated by the very country they are trying to protect.This has been an issue within the military since the very beginnings of its establishment of this nation since â€Å"The discharge of military personnel for homosexual behavior dates from at least the continental army of the revolutionary period† (Rayside 258). The military had a strict no gays allowed to serve for many years and it wasn’t until former president Clinton raised the issue in his campaign for presidency in 1991 did it come onto the radar of the news and on the minds of the American people.He promised to fight to have it so gays could serve in the armed forces of the United States. When he was elected president he set out to change things. Then President made a effort to change the policy but â€Å"Clinton was persuaded by the military, mobilize d by Chief of Staff Colin Powell, not to fulfill his campaign promise to allow gays and leasbians to serve openly† (Pencak 178). He was unable to change the policy drastically and had to settle for a compromise with the military and congress. This is where we got the still standing don’t ask don’t tell policy.This new law allowed gays to serve but they were required to keep their sexual orientation private and by going public with it would end in discharge from the service. The new policy also covered any homosexual actions stating that â€Å"A service member who engages in, attempts to engage in, or solicits a homosexual act is to be discharged, unless he can prove that such an act was an aberration and is unlikely to recur† (Hillman 264). If they were to state that they were gays or attempt to marry someone of the same sex this would too lead to termination.The phrase â€Å"don’t ask don’t tell† comes from the fact that no one will e ver ask if you are gays; as the military used to screen potential future military members by asking them before they joined. The don’t ask tell part comes from the fact that a gay service member must not tell anyone that they are homosexual. Later â€Å"don’t pursue† would added to it, meaning that the military would not pursue a suspected gay member as long as they didn’t tell. This was established out of fear that people would conduct â€Å"witch hunts† for gay members.Since the 1980s over 32,000 active duty members have been discharged for being gay. This is a large percent of people who were willing to serve but through no fault of their own we told they could not and were sent on their way. That is 32,000 already fully trained personnel that had to be replaced costing the country millions of dollars. There had been cases were people with key jobs being discharged as in a few Arabic translators be discharge when as of now they are in great dema nd. Discharging these personal is non sense. Not only is it violating their rights, â€Å"U.S. law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, race, or gender with regard to the rights of citizenship, the military maintains policies that are opposed to this most-basic American ideal† but it is putting this country and other service members at risk cause translators are a key competent of fighting the war on terror (Issit 4). How can a military succeed in winning the hearts and minds of people they cannot even talk with? The number of service members discharged each year in the United States is approximately 1,000-1,200.All of which are needed to be replaced with new people who require training. Losing the experience of those who were serving longer period of times is detrimental to the military because they possess the knowledge and skills required to accomplish the mission and have the ability to pass they knowledge on to new personnel. The amount of money r equired to replace them is enough that any tax paying American would be upset about. There are many reasons for someone to be discharged, from drug use to medical reasons.By changing this law the country would be losing a third less personnel each year. The American public is split on the issue. With about 60% saying that gays should be allowed to serve and 40% feeling they should be able to serve openly. A service wide survey was conducted asking the opinions of those who would be serving side by side with gays. The views of current service member varied much like that of American civilians. But they had reason for their concern when it came to those who opposed it. They were concerns about privacy issues.They were not comfortable with living with a known homosexual. The military does not allow males and females to share a room and there is concern having a same sex and gays living together. This might lead to a change in housing policy and bathroom faculties in having to separate men and women and gay men and lesbian women. This would lead to having to make new restrooms and building of new living quarters for gays. With another concern being the effect on Unit cohesion which can be broken down in two parts; task cohesion and social cohesion.Task cohesion referring to the ability to work together effectively in order to accomplish a mission and social cohesion referring to the emotional bonds and trust among unit members (US Government, DoD 102). The military is worried that gays would become a distraction for straights and this would disrupt the comradely between troops, all of which is very important in a wartime setting â€Å"because soldiers must withstand the tremendous emotional strain of seeing many of their friends brutally killed by the enemy† (Wilson 2). There are also religious and moral issues that have been brought up.The fact is that most religions say the homosexuality is wrong and by making personnel who are religious serve with gays i nfringes on the religious beliefs and the right to religious freedom in the military. Some feel that being gay is just wrong and do no want to be force to work alongside or live with someone of is known to be gay. Some also believe that don’t ask don’t tell law is working just fine and that it should just stay that way feeling that gays can serve but they just have to keep their sexuality to themselves.The same people feel that right now is not the best time to change the policy. Service member have a lot on their plates right now fighting two wars it that a change in the don’t ask don’t tell policy right now is just not the time to do so. There are some who are concerned that if gays were to serve openly then that would result in unwanted sexual advances and assaults. There is objection to gays showing public displays of affection. And that a gays flamboyant behavior would be a distraction. The possibility of a rise in HIV is of concern too.There is a be lief that AIDS is a running epidemic in the gay community and by allowing those to serve would lead to a increase in the HIV cases in the services. Marriage is another issue in that where would the money come from to pay for all the new cases of same sex marriages because married members receive benefits for the spouses and are paid more too. Some members feel that gays would become a protected class and in return would be forced to acknowledge gay pride week and be forced to mingle with them outside of work. With the fear that if they chose no too there would be displiniary actions placed against them.Other feel that the military is the last moral institution in America and feel that allowing gays to serve would destroy that. There are many service members that feel that gays should be allowed to serve openly and the have reasons for their support of the repeal of don’t ask don’t tell policy. Many know that there already are gays serving and by allowing them to acknow ledge their sexual orientation is not going to change anything. There is a feeling that as long as the gay service member can do their job then there is no reason they cannot serve.A person in America has the right to be who they are and by discharging a gay person who only wants to fight and protect the country that provides them that right is wrong. Any American regardless of sexual orientation should be allowed to sever their country. In given that this is a time of war the military needs every service member it can get. Since it is an all volunteer force they should allow anyone who wants to volunteer serve. The military is behind the times when is comes to its policy of homosexuals. It is the only institution that is discriminating openly against gays.It is illegal to fire a person from their jobs for being gays any where else they could be working and the military should be no different. Upon looking at the results of other militaries allowing gays to serve it is scene that it really has no effect on anything what so ever. So there is no reason not to believe that the some non-event would happen in the United States military too. If one is too look on when the military started to allow blacks and white to sever together as well as men and women it is seen that this was not harmful, but actually beneficial to the military as a whole.It is a brden to gays in the military to have to hide their homosexuality and that if there was a repeal to this law then that would liberate them from the fear of discharge. It is not that gays want to be able to tell everyone that they are gay but more that they won’t be afraid of losing their job if it were found out. â€Å"Sexual harassment regulations and sensitivity training would need to be updated, and guidance from leadership would be necessary† if this transition to a openly gay military is to be done (Prakash 92).History is said to repeat itself and if that is the case then there should be no problems associated with the repeal of the â€Å"don’t ask, don’t tell† law. Prior to 1953 blacks were not allowed to serve in the same unit as whites. There are similarities to be found when comparing concerns for when the racial integration of African-Americans was underway and the integration of homosexuals today in that â€Å"military leaders predicted disastrous consequences for unit cohesion, discipline, troop morale, and the achievement of military goals† (Knapp 239).Racial integration was a much bigger deal to the country than that of the integration of gays today. We can see that once racial integration was implemented that it turned out just fine. But it must be acknowledged that blacks are not gays so it won’t be exactly the same type of movement. The integration of women into the military also came out in positive terms. Though gender integration was slower than that of blacks, it is fully integrated today. Today women and blacks make up a sizab le portion of the military and without their service the military would not as strong as it is today.Women and African-Americans have succeeded in the U. S. military so there is no reason to believe that gays and lesbians cannot do the same. Many other nations’ military allow gays to openly serve and they experienced few if any problems because of it. It is such a non existent problem that it is considered a non-issue to most. The major militaries to open to gays are the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Germany, and Israel. When these countries lifted their bans on gays in their militaries they noticed that nothing changed.In a official report released by the Canadian government it was stated that â€Å"Despite all the anxiety that existed through the late 80’s into the early 90’s about the change in policy, here’s what the indicators show—no effect† (Belkin 108). It was thought that maybe a mass coming out would happen but it didn’ t. Most still chose to keep their sexual orientation a private matter and only disclosed it to certain people, much like gays in the corporate world or anywhere else for that matter.The repeal is more for gays not to be discharged or fear being discharged for being gay and less for them to be able to go around and tell everyone that they are gay. There were no noticeable changes to recruiting numbers of the number of people choosing to remain in the military as a result of the lift ban on gays. The United Kingdom show no increase in same sex harassment and most countries commented that harassment die to gender integration was far more pronounced then harassment die to sexual orientation (US Government, DoD 92).This shows one that there is no reason that the integration of gays into the U. S. military will be difficult for its service members to adapt to. It will surely be a non-issue here itself. When looking at the issue of integrating gays into other organizations it is seen that many on the same things occurred that happened in the militaries that did the same. In 1998 an Executive Order was established in the prohibition of discrimination based on the sexual orientation for civilian employees in all Federal agencies. Many states have done the same with state organizations.It is to be noted that employees of these institutions reported that having day and lesbian personnel among their ranks has had no effect on their organization’s performance (US Government, DoD 94). It was found that in some cases allowing gays to be open about their sexual orientation actually improved their performance because now they were not worried about someone finding out they were gay and we able to put more focus on their work. When looking at the issue of privacy that was of a concern to some service members it was seen that in these organizations there was no need for additional accommodations for gays and lesbians.They also say the same thing when it came to gays publi cally announcing their homosexuality. It was found that none really chose to come out to everybody but instead only to certain people. And as far as service member worrying about the â€Å"flamboyant behavior† one might witness in the military by a gay is just not the case in the corporate world. Gays are very well aware of the professionalism associated with a Federal or State job and surely would be the case for any gay military member and would not act in such a way. There are many sides to this debate and given the concerns of each side it should be looked at carefully.When one does observe each side they can see that the concerns of those opposed to the repeal of don’t ask don’t tell are trivial and based on stereotypes and should not be enough to stop and any American from serving their country. The loss of personnel is unacceptable when their service is needed the most in these times of war. When seeing how other militaries favored with their lifting of b ans on gays it can be seen that it was so little a problem and should be the case here. Today’s troops do have a lot going on with fighting two wars and don’t need another thing on their plate, but they do need every helping hand they can get.It most likely would be the case that if repealed many troops would not disclose their sexual orientation so much would not change since a lot of troops know that they are already serving along side gays and lesbians. When weighing the pros and cons of this issue one shouldn’t be able to infringe on a American’s desire to serve their country based on their sexual orientation. It be great if these brave gay and lesbian women didn’t have to worry about their military careers coming to an end of they were or someone were to disclose their sexual orientation that way they would be able to fully concentrate on their mission.

Multi Layered Security Plan Essay

Simplicity of user’s passwords can be a major problem so we need to implement complex passwords including eight or more characters, both upper and lower case, and use of at least one special character. Passwords will need to be changed every three months and the same password cannot be used again for one calendar year. In the workstation domain, we need to make sure that each of the workstations, whether desktop or laptop, has antivirus and malware protection installed on them. Laptops are very vulnerable for loss or theft, so all company laptops should have an encrypted hard drive so that if they are stolen, the data contained on them is not recovered by anyone but the owner. For the LAN domain, we need to have training about email scams. Most users know not to access suspicious emails when on our system but a quick training course will help. Also, adding spam filters will help get rid of most of the junk email, so there is much less risk of employees opening emails containing malware. In the LAN-to-WAN domain, we need to shut down the FTP server we have running and switch it over to use secure FTP so that only users allowed on our system can access our FTP server. In the WAN domain, we need to make sure that we have firewalls set up on our network to filter all incoming traffic. A firewall will stop all traffic coming on to our system that is not meant or not wanted on the Richman Investments network. For the remote access domain, we need to make sure the VPN we use is secure so that our employees are not exposing sensitive data to anyone outside of our network. In order to do this we will make sure that everyone using a VPN to access our network has to authenticate to the system to get authorization. For the systems/application domain, we need to lessen chances for attacks on our servers. This will be done by figuring out which ports and services are not being used and shutting off access to those ports. This will give hackers less ways onto our system. Also we need to make sure all servers have the latest patches and updates. These updates provide the latest security patches and keep our servers running at their full potential with less likelihood of vulnerabilities. Applying all these security measures will ensure a much safer environment, technically speaking. This multi-layered security approach will help keep our network secure and running smoothly.

Real Gas Definition and Examples

Real Gas Definition and Examples A real gas is a gas that does not behave as an ideal gas due to interactions between gas molecules. A real gas is also known as a nonideal gas because the behavior of a real gas in only approximated by the ideal gas law. When Real Gases Differ From Ideal Gases Usually, its fine to use the ideal gas law to make calculations for gases. However, the approximation gives considerable error at very high pressure, near the critical point, or near the condensation point of a gas. Unlike ideal gases, a real gas is subject to: Van der Waals forcesCompressibility effectsNon-equilibrium thermodynamic effectsVariable specific heat capacityVariable composition, including molecular dissociation and other chemical reactions Real Gas Example While cool air at ordinary pressure behaves like an ideal gas, increasing its pressure or temperature increases the interactions between molecules, resulting in real gas behavior that cannot be predicted reliably using the ideal gas law. Sources Cengel, Yunus A. and Michael A. Boles (2010). Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach (7th Ed.). McGraw-Hill. ISBN 007-352932-X.Xiang, H. W. (2005). The Corresponding-States Principle and its Practice: Thermodynamic, Transport and Surface Properties of Fluids. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-08-045904-2.

Environmental Ethics and the Principles of Pluralism and Environmental Pragmatism Essays

Environmental Ethics and the Principles of Pluralism and Environmental Pragmatism Essays Environmental Ethics and the Principles of Pluralism and Environmental Pragmatism Paper Environmental Ethics and the Principles of Pluralism and Environmental Pragmatism Paper by Chum Hamilton Environmental Ethics ENV362 Professor Dave Williams August 16, 2008 CONTENTS Pluralism and Environmental Pragmatism3 My Response6 References9 Pluralism and Environmental Pragmatism With the widely differing theoretical environmental ethic philosophical frameworks that are currently espoused, it is clear that a single unified theory has not yet emanated from this discipline. This has frustrated â€Å"monists† within the discipline. Monists contend that there must be a single environmental ethic framework that is the only true framework. Underpinning this standpoint is the idea that environmental ethics would be devoid of any objectivity if there is not a single â€Å"true† theoretical framework: â€Å"One strong motivation behind moral monism is the fear of the alternative. Without a single unified and coherent theory, we seem relegated to ethical relativism† (Desjardins, 2006, p. 262). In contrast to the monists, â€Å"pluralists† are those who â€Å"accept the possibility that more than one basic approach can be legitimate† (Desjardins, 2006, p. 262) and they subscribe to â€Å"a plurality of moral truths,† as opposed to the relativist, who contends that lack of a single truth means that there can be no moral truth. Desjardins notes that â€Å"perhaps it is a mistake to apply scientific and mathematical standards to ethics. Perhaps we are asking too much when we seek clear, unambiguous and certain decisions on ethical matters. Perhaps we can be rational about ethical matters without having unequivocal, definitive answers† (Desjardins, 2006, p. 263). Environmental pragmatism acknowledges moral pluralism, and focuses less on what is true, per se, and more on what it is that we should do about issues. It is a very â€Å"contextual† approach in that each issue presents its own complexities that need to be reviewed in order to begin to make a decision. Pragmatists â€Å"understand that practical reasoning may not always offer unambiguous advice† (Desjardins, 2006, p. 66). Desjardins also goes on to describe that â€Å"pragmatism also supports democratic values such as tolerance and respect for diverse opinions and the commitment to engaging in free and open procedures for deciding rather than seeking the single ‘true’ decision† (Desjardins, 2006, p. 266). Desjardin then goes on to note that he had a personal experience where a task force had to make a difference. Apparent ly, the task force was not able to make much headway in its first two years of existence. He contends that this resulted from the fact that the first two years were characterized by the task force members coming at the issue unyieldingly from whatever their theoretical viewpoint was that they began the meetings with. He feels that once the task force began focusing on what the different participants actually did already agree on that they really started to gain momentum and make headway with the issue: â€Å"the alternative began with the practical matter of getting things done, and it did this by starting with specific issues on which people agreed. Ultimately, ‘theory’ followed practice in the sense that the final governing principle was developed out of the agreed upon starting points† (Desjardins, 2006, p. 267). Critics of environmental pragmatism claim that the decision plans that emanate from this pragmatism approach are really nothing more than more of the same. In other words, they still reflect business as usual and the status quo. Pragmatists feel as if this criticism is not valid because they view the pragmatic approach to decision-making as a venue through which opinions not in step with the status quo get surfaced so that more people may benefit from them as they make decisions. In other words, because this process makes differing positions known and because it makes the black-box of the decision-making process transparent, then it opens the door for the status quo to evolve: â€Å"as values are brought in line with practices, they evolve to guide future practices, which in turn shape future values† (Desjardins, 2006, p. 268). Critics also feel that because pragmatism relies heavily on the notion that decisions should be made within that context within which they arise that it must, therefore, be relativistic. Desjardins notes that pragmatists have responded to this criticism by claiming that they are more interested in what is reasonable as opposed to what is true. And, further, they hold that there are standards to reasonableness that are upheld: 1) intellectual and moral openness, 2) intellectual and moral care, and 3) attention to detail. These standards â€Å"prevent the collapse of pragmatism into relativism† (Desjardins, 2006, p. 69). My Response Information I have read to date regarding pluralism and environmental pragmatism leads me to believe that these approaches are more aligned with my own personal values and ethical beliefs than are the other environmental ethics frameworks we have surveyed in this class. However, I would not be comfortable referring to pluralism and environmental prag matism as an â€Å"environmental ethic framework† in and of itself. It strikes me more like a valid decision-making process that may eventually lead to establishing a more coherent framework rather than a framework itself. As Kelly Parker noted in her chapter in Environmental Pragmatism, â€Å"Pragmatism sees philosophical ethics as an ongoing attempt to determine what is good, and what actions are right† (Parker, 1996, p. 30). It also strikes me as the only way we will actually be able to get anything done with respect to solving/mitigating environmental problems in the meantime while the debates over the â€Å"correct unified theory† continue. However, I am not too deeply discounting the role of theoretical environmental ethic frameworks- without these multiple frameworks, the â€Å"plural† would be taken out of â€Å"pluralism. Obviously, these theories will (and should) continue to evolve. I just feel that when we are dealing with environmental issues, we should look to pluralism and pragmatism as our â€Å"first responder. † In many situations, we are in an environmental emergency and time is of the essence. Pragmatic approaches are probably the only approaches that ca n be agreed upon the fastest. Imagine the time it would take us to agree on the one â€Å"true† theory before we were able to even decide what to do! It will take a lot less time to agree on at least some things that can be done now in order to help solve environmental issues. Supporting the notion that theory should not be too deeply discounted if pragmatism is to gain ground is Piers H. G. Stevens, the feature editor for the Sage publication Organization and Environment. In his book review of Bryan G. Norton’s Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management voices a concern that political participation has waned and corporate monopoly power has grown and that this situation threatens true democracy. Consequently, he doesn’t share Norton’s desire to dispose with theory and focus only on the pragmatic. He feels that theory is needed as inspiration â€Å"to help reclaim true democracy in the public sphere. (pg 391). Thus it seems to me that theory without pragmatism is foolish, but pragmatism without theory is just as foolish. I very much enjoyed the way that Desjardins ended the textbook chapter on pluralism and environmental pragmatism. He made note of the three pillars of sustainable development when writing â€Å"A s ustainable future must be sustainable on three related grounds: economic, environmental, and ethical. † (pg. 269). Reviewing the issues that were brought up in this course allowed me to see that for many, many years we have gone about our business as if we were in a vacuum and that environmental issues didn’t need our attention. This â€Å"discounting environmental matters† is clearly the wrong way to approach our current and future existence. However, we should not let the pendulum swing too far in the other direction where we discount economic needs. It is true that too much of a focus on economic considerations may have caused us to be short-sighted. However, we should not lose sight of the importance of the economy. We have in fact already done this if you ask me. In my opinion, we did this a while back when we elevated the notion of the â€Å"economy† so high up that we let people become subservient to the â€Å"economy. All interests- environmental, social, spiritual, and individual- may be better served if we take a view of the economy where the â€Å"economy should be for the people† not where â€Å"the people should be for the economy. † In many ways, our economy is also very much part of our human habitat and we must be concerned with it since it is the venue through wh ich we are able to work in exchange for goods and services that we NEED. Of course, there are also plenty of goods and services that we don’t need. These are expressions of our wants as opposed to our needs. Human survival is as important as is the survival of anything else on this planet. However, it is undoubtedly the case that notions of human comfort should be revisited in light of the importance of the survival of other things on this planet. References Desjardins, J. (2006). Environmental Ethics: An Introduction to Environmental Philosophy (4th ed. ). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth. Parker, K. (1996). Pragmatism and environmental thought. In A. Light E. Katz (Eds. ), Environmental Pragmatism (pp. 21-37). New York: Routledge. Stephens, P. (2007). Sustainability, democracy, and pragmatism in Bryan Nortons philosophy of ecosystem management. Organization and Environment, 20, 386-392.